The central message of Expelled is bullshit. They claim that six scientists were persecuted for their views on "intelligent design." Hence, the title of the movie. It turns out that it's a fabrication.

The central message of Bowling for Columbine is that Americans are obsessed with guns, and a number of other ancillary points about violence in American culture. Editing a Charlton Heston speech uncharitably does not alter that message, even if the editing is dishonest. Omitting that section entirely wouldn't alter the message. There are far more gun-related homicides in the United States than other first world nations. That's not a fiction.

Nice wikipedia link. If it comes out of Michael Moore's head, it's dismissed as bullshit by me and you aren't going to convince me if you link the library of congress.

Ah, a prime example of conservative anti-intellectualism, the cancer that has destroyed the philosophical underpinnings of the American conservative movement.

FACTS are FACTS. If Moore says that the sky is blue, that's a fact. It's INTERPRETATIONS that are up for grabs and based on opinion.

The basic FACTS about, say, comparative costs for citizens in different countries who need healthcare in Sicko are accurate, or they're not facts. Facts don't simply become opinion because you don't like the speaker. Now, the interpretation and conclusions drawn from those facts are debatable, but that's a totally different matter.

With a movie like Expelled, people aren't raising alarms simply because they disagree with the interpretations and conclusions drawn by the filmmakers, but because the things presented as "facts," even in the preview, simply aren't factual information by any meaningful measure. That's the difference between Moore's Sicko and this film.

If you can't see that, then you're really not going to be able to contribute anything useful to a conversation about either film.

I don't wish to contribute to conversations about either film. My comments were that these films are full of lies and half truths on both sides, and I don't go to the theatre to watch them.

So that prime example in Bowling for Columbine of Moore editing Charlton Heston speeches together to misrepresent what Heston was truly saying isn't a "core fundamental misrepresentation"?

Sure it is, but misrepresentation of a crazed actor who is being used as a figurehead isn't the same as misrepresenting a philosopher or scientist who actually knows what he is talking about.

That actor chose to be the spokesman for the NRA because he believes in it. You speak of the NRA as if they are some shadowy backroom smoke and mirrors group. They are actually made up of 4 million citizens, and you can join any day you want and participate. I was a recruiter for the NRA an signed up many folks. I did it in my own time, but the NRA sent me materials and the like. It was my time and energy expended by my own choice. Charton Heston's time and energy by his own choice contributed to the cause as well.

I have very good health coverage. I take advantage of the freedoms of this country to advance my career and keep a good job.

You're fortunate. Fifty million people in this country aren't as fortunate, and it's usually not for the lack of trying to "take advantage of the freedoms of this country". You've got a great deal of hubris if you think that you're immune to bad luck, but I find that many conservative leaning people can't empathize with those who're less fortunate until they find themselves in a bad situation.

The central message of Expelled is bullshit. They claim that six scientists were persecuted for their views on "intelligent design." Hence, the title of the movie. It turns out that it's a fabrication.

The central message of Bowling for Columbine is that Americans are obsessed with guns, and a number of other ancillary points about violence in American culture. Editing a Charlton Heston speech uncharitably does not alter that message, even if the editing is dishonest. Omitting that section entirely wouldn't alter the message. There are far more gun-related homicides in the United States than other first world nations. That's not a fiction.

Yes... but there are nations with higher percentages of gun ownership with far fewer gun related homicides. The problem is not in guns, but society and culture.

I have very good health coverage. I take advantage of the freedoms of this country to advance my career and keep a good job.

You're fortunate. Fifty million people in this country aren't as fortunate, and it's usually not for the lack of trying to "take advantage of the freedoms of this country". You've got a great deal of hubris if you think that you're immune to bad luck, but I find that many conservative leaning people can't empathize with those who're less fortunate until they find themselves in a bad situation.

I'm not fortunate. I'm hard working. I secured my education. I constantly work on my skills so that if I get layed off my resume will be pristine. I worked my way to an education, to a job, and now to success. Nobody gave me anything -- not even paid for my education. I had pay the debt of going to get my skills off too.

I have very good health coverage. I take advantage of the freedoms of this country to advance my career and keep a good job.

You're fortunate. Fifty million people in this country aren't as fortunate, and it's usually not for the lack of trying to "take advantage of the freedoms of this country". You've got a great deal of hubris if you think that you're immune to bad luck, but I find that many conservative leaning people can't empathize with those who're less fortunate until they find themselves in a bad situation.

I'm not fortunate. I'm hard working. I secured my education. I constantly work on my skills so that if I get layed off my resume will be pristine. I worked my way to an education, to a job, and now to success. Nobody gave me anything -- not even paid for my education. I had pay the debt of going to get my skills off too.

You may be hard working, but you're still fortunate. If you get laid off and can't find work despite your pristine resume because the economy's screwed, you'll be unfortunate. If you develop a chronic illness and can't find new health care because of a pre-existing condition, you'll be unfortunate. If your existing health care refuses to cover some necessary medication because it's "experimental", you'll be unfortunate. Hard work is sometimes not enough, particularly for those people who start out at the bottom without the advantages that skin color and gender can confer.

Besides, the United States gave you everything. If you'd been born in Durango or Coahuila, I'm sure your life and perspective would be very different.

You may be hard working, but you're still fortunate. If you get laid off and can't find work despite your pristine resume because the economy's screwed, you'll be unfortunate.

One scenario that may well happen if Obama is elected in November.

Quote

If you develop a chronic illness and can't find new health care because of a pre-existing condition, you'll be unfortunate. If your existing health care refuses to cover some necessary medication because it's "experimental", you'll be unfortunate. Hard work is sometimes not enough, particularly for those people who start out at the bottom without the advantages that skin color and gender can confer.

You are really saying gender and skin color is a barrier to being successful? Give me a break! Corporate America is full speed ahead with diversity hiring, education, and development initiatives. I have at least a diversity class every two quarters. I work for a woman and have a dotted line to a black man. They are both very intelligent, driven, and successful people that have had no problems rising in the corporation.

Quote

Besides, the United States gave you everything. If you'd been born in Durango or Coahuila, I'm sure your life and perspective would be very different.

Of course I would. The United States gave me opportunity and freedom. I used both to work my way through college, earn a degree, pay off the remaining debt, and be successful.

This is all very far afield from the topic of Expelled, and how intellectually dishonest it is, so I'll confine myself to one more response on the topic of opportunity.

Gender and race are certainly still issues in this country, and the two exceptions you cite don't prove the rule (although it's a common logical fallacy marched out by conservatives who want to kill affirmative action, or who fight the equal rights amendment). There's plenty of studies that show significant differences in the workplace, and I'd dig up a bunch of links if I thought you'd ever admit any evidence that contradicted your existing beliefs. However, you've already said that facts aren't what's most important to you, so I'll save myself the heartache and just forget about it.

This is all very far afield from the topic of Expelled, and how intellectually dishonest it is, so I'll confine myself to one more response on the topic of opportunity.

Gender and race are certainly still issues in this country, and the two exceptions you cite don't prove the rule (although it's a common logical fallacy marched out by conservatives who want to kill affirmative action, or who fight the equal rights amendment). There's plenty of studies that show significant differences in the workplace, and I'd dig up a bunch of links if I thought you'd ever admit any evidence that contradicted your existing beliefs. However, you've already said that facts aren't what's most important to you, so I'll save myself the heartache and just forget about it.

If there is a difference in racial makup in corporate america, it's because there is a difference in the number of candidates. We have clear diversity goals, and it's placed almost to a sacred level of importance in the company. I don't disagree with those initiatives either -- they are important to getting a good mix of perspectives and skills. In other words, those initiatives in corporate America are critical to a competitive and successful workplace in my opinion.

The wholesale discrimination that some people somehow think happens isn't going on. It's not happening. There are far too much education, initiatives, and emphasis being put on this in all levels of the organization. If someone even suspected someone was racist or discriminating at all, it would spell the end of that person's career one way or another.

I think you are inferring that my avatar is racist? If not, then I totally misread your intentions.If so... then you have a warped sense of reality. This guy (Wright) has been spouting hate for years. Just because it's aimed at white people doesn't make it excuseable.

Jeremiah Wright gave up a student deferment to join the Marine Corps during Vietnam where he served two years, transferred to the Navy where he graduated as valedictorian of his corpsman school class, graduated the naval medical center as salutatorian, and was awarded three letters of commendation by the Johnson White House for his medical care of the President of the United States of America. He's unquestionably a patriot who has earned, more than you or I, the right to use the first amendment to speak out about things he considers injustices.

In that spirit, here's another famous African-American pastor:

Quote from: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

I could not be silent in the face of such cruel manipulation of the poor. My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettoes of the North over the last three years -- especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked -- and rightly so -- what about Vietnam?

They asked if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.

Jeremiah Wright gave up a student deferment to join the Marine Corps during Vietnam where he served two years, transferred to the Navy where he graduated as valedictorian of his corpsman school class, graduated the naval medical center as salutatorian, and was awarded three letters of commendation by the Johnson White House for his medical care of the President of the United States of America. He's unquestionably a patriot who has earned, more than you or I, the right to use the first amendment to speak out about things he considers injustices.

And so someone that does all that can't be an anti-white bigot?

Quote

“In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01. White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.” --Wright

Oh, please. You'd be saying the same things about King that you're saying about Wright today. After all, King said "America was founded on genocide, and a nation that is founded on genocide is destructive." James Cone, the originator of black liberation theology, cites King as an inspiration.

You either 1) don't care or 2) don't understand the context of Wright's speeches, and the purpose of black theology, which arose as a direct response to segregation. There's plenty of reading material about it on the internet, but if I recall correctly, you live in a state that elected George Wallace to a landslide victory in the early 60s. Roll Tide.

You either 1) don't care or 2) don't understand the context of Wright's speeches

In what context is it OK to say that the American government created AIDS as a means of destroying black people? Face it, Wright is a hate-monger, and you weaken your arguments by actually attempting to defend the guy. White guilt can only take you so far.

The wholesale discrimination that some people somehow think happens isn't going on. It's not happening.

Have you ever compared to the per capita spending on the education of a black child in an inner city school district with the per capita spending on the education of a white kid in the suburban school district just a few miles away? Particularly in the South, we set minorities up to fail by establishing school districts whose funding is determined by the home values of the neighborhoods around the school -- thus poor kids, in need of the biggest hand up 'cause they'll never be able to actually afford to pay for college, end up with the worst teachers, the worst facilities and out of date textbooks.

Middle class whites of a generation ago picked up and moved out of the cities when the big bad government said it wasn't okay to shunt black students into separate schools anymore, thus using geography to re-establish the segregation that mere statute was no longer able to achieve. In the process, the "white flight" destroyed property values because of the mass sell-off, thus further wounding the now "integrated" mostly-minority urban districts. Of course, white Americans today are not racist like their parents and grandparents were, but the geographic bifurcation of American society continues to exist, because it's become hardwired into the design of our communities.

So while outright, wholesale discrimination like we used to have in the South may not exist anymore, but it's legacy lives on. And conservatives fight reasonable efforts to pool and more reasonably distribute educational funds, preferring instead to push non-solutions like "vouchers" which would do nothing to help most inner-city school kids, as suburban schools don't want them, vouchers or no, and neither suburban districts or private schools have the capacity to take them... all vouchers would do is drain away a few of the best and brightest and leave the rest of the students to rot in an even further under-funded system.

You cannot say that race is not a problem in America while the quagmire of uneven education continues to ill-serve minority children, blocking their aspirations and limiting their dreams. Even a kid more hard working and determined than you claim to have been will have a hard time succeeding with the entire educational deck stacked against him. He won't get the education his peers in the suburbs will get. He won't come out of high school with the same skills. He won't have the extracurricular activities that make an application pop. His parents aren't alumni anywhere, which puts him at a further disadvantage. Oh, and he can't afford college, and federal college loans are being cut to pay for Bush's idiotic tax cuts.

There is still a great deal of work to be done to repair the legacy of racism in this country. Only a fool would deny that even this present generation of minority children is at an institutional, pervasive disadvantage when it comes to competing. The problem is still here amongst us. Apparently you don't see it, from your privileged point of view.

So while outright, wholesale discrimination like we used to have in the South may not exist anymore, but it's legacy lives on. And conservatives fight reasonable efforts to pool and more reasonably distribute educational funds, preferring instead to push non-solutions like "vouchers" which would do nothing to help most inner-city school kids, as suburban schools don't want them, vouchers or no, and neither suburban districts or private schools have the capacity to take them... all vouchers would do is drain away a few of the best and brightest and leave the rest of the students to rot in an even further under-funded system.

Because it's all about the funds right? That'll cure the dropout rate and horrible attendance rate and the illiteracy rates and the lack of parent involvement in the inner city?

Personally, I think liberals need to take a back seat on the whole inner city problem. Pretty much every one of the inner cities are run by a democratic mayor, and have been exclusively for decades. Instead of taking even more disproportionately from the white kids in Northern Michigan to pay for the black kids in Detroit, a better solution would be to break the long cycle of corrupt democratic mayors and school boards.

I think you are inferring that my avatar is racist? If not, then I totally misread your intentions.If so... then you have a warped sense of reality. This guy (Wright) has been spouting hate for years. Just because it's aimed at white people doesn't make it excuseable.

Just curious -and I want an honest answer here - do you see Wright and his comments any differently than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell?

The wholesale discrimination that some people somehow think happens isn't going on. It's not happening.

Have you ever compared to the per capita spending on the education of a black child in an inner city school district with the per capita spending on the education of a white kid in the suburban school district just a few miles away? Particularly in the South, we set minorities up to fail by establishing school districts whose funding is determined by the home values of the neighborhoods around the school -- thus poor kids, in need of the biggest hand up 'cause they'll never be able to actually afford to pay for college, end up with the worst teachers, the worst facilities and out of date textbooks.

Middle class whites of a generation ago picked up and moved out of the cities when the big bad government said it wasn't okay to shunt black students into separate schools anymore, thus using geography to re-establish the segregation that mere statute was no longer able to achieve. In the process, the "white flight" destroyed property values because of the mass sell-off, thus further wounding the now "integrated" mostly-minority urban districts. Of course, white Americans today are not racist like their parents and grandparents were, but the geographic bifurcation of American society continues to exist, because it's become hardwired into the design of our communities.

So while outright, wholesale discrimination like we used to have in the South may not exist anymore, but it's legacy lives on. And conservatives fight reasonable efforts to pool and more reasonably distribute educational funds, preferring instead to push non-solutions like "vouchers" which would do nothing to help most inner-city school kids, as suburban schools don't want them, vouchers or no, and neither suburban districts or private schools have the capacity to take them... all vouchers would do is drain away a few of the best and brightest and leave the rest of the students to rot in an even further under-funded system.

You cannot say that race is not a problem in America while the quagmire of uneven education continues to ill-serve minority children, blocking their aspirations and limiting their dreams. Even a kid more hard working and determined than you claim to have been will have a hard time succeeding with the entire educational deck stacked against him. He won't get the education his peers in the suburbs will get. He won't come out of high school with the same skills. He won't have the extracurricular activities that make an application pop. His parents aren't alumni anywhere, which puts him at a further disadvantage. Oh, and he can't afford college, and federal college loans are being cut to pay for Bush's idiotic tax cuts.

There is still a great deal of work to be done to repair the legacy of racism in this country. Only a fool would deny that even this present generation of minority children is at an institutional, pervasive disadvantage when it comes to competing. The problem is still here amongst us. Apparently you don't see it, from your privileged point of view.

What you are talking about is systemic, not outright perpetrated by corporations or business. My point was that there is a real effort in business these days to level the playing field and promote minority candidates. It's having a real impact in my company -- and for the positive.

I think you are inferring that my avatar is racist? If not, then I totally misread your intentions.If so... then you have a warped sense of reality. This guy (Wright) has been spouting hate for years. Just because it's aimed at white people doesn't make it excuseable.

Just curious -and I want an honest answer here - do you see Wright and his comments any differently than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell?

Oh, please. You'd be saying the same things about King that you're saying about Wright today. After all, King said "America was founded on genocide, and a nation that is founded on genocide is destructive." James Cone, the originator of black liberation theology, cites King as an inspiration.

You either 1) don't care or 2) don't understand the context of Wright's speeches, and the purpose of black theology, which arose as a direct response to segregation. There's plenty of reading material about it on the internet, but if I recall correctly, you live in a state that elected George Wallace to a landslide victory in the early 60s. Roll Tide.

So while outright, wholesale discrimination like we used to have in the South may not exist anymore, but it's legacy lives on. And conservatives fight reasonable efforts to pool and more reasonably distribute educational funds, preferring instead to push non-solutions like "vouchers" which would do nothing to help most inner-city school kids, as suburban schools don't want them, vouchers or no, and neither suburban districts or private schools have the capacity to take them... all vouchers would do is drain away a few of the best and brightest and leave the rest of the students to rot in an even further under-funded system.

Because it's all about the funds right? That'll cure the dropout rate and horrible attendance rate and the illiteracy rates and the lack of parent involvement in the inner city?

Funding is a major part of it. How about this, if funding has nothing to do with it, why don't we cap all per capita expenditures in every district in each state to the lowest per capita expenditure in the state?

Of course, Tom and Lily White would freak out about such an idea, as it would severely hamper their kid's education -- and they'd be right to freak out.

We need a major overhaul of many components of our educational system, but first and foremost we need more money for our schools. Education should be our highest priority, and our budgets should reflect that. We need to be paying teachers dramatically more, to attract better teachers to the profession. We need up to date technology, better science labs, cleaner, safer schools.

If local school boards are a problem, and in many cities they are, then they should be suspended and direct control by state educational agencies or an appointed "czar" should be imposed for a limited period of time, during which school district election districts can be changed, etc. The same goes in situations where a bunch of right-wing anti-intellectuals get elected and try to oust science and replace it with fable, demoting biology in favor of belief.

I do not agree with the reverend's sentiments. What I believe is that your beliefs about the progress of demographics you proclaim is somewhat less than the reality that exists. I also believe if you are bold enough to say it to spoiled twits on a Videogame forum, your convictions are less admirable than if you were bold enough to walk in a troubled community and say what you believe to anyone who would listen.

I think you are inferring that my avatar is racist? If not, then I totally misread your intentions.If so... then you have a warped sense of reality. This guy (Wright) has been spouting hate for years. Just because it's aimed at white people doesn't make it excuseable.

Just curious -and I want an honest answer here - do you see Wright and his comments any differently than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell?

Yes.

So saying America deserved 9/11 because of the racist evils that have been perpetuated in this nation is beyond the pale... but saying that America deserved 9/11 because we've been shunned by God for being nice to gays, women, "liberals" et al is okay.

I think you are inferring that my avatar is racist? If not, then I totally misread your intentions.If so... then you have a warped sense of reality. This guy (Wright) has been spouting hate for years. Just because it's aimed at white people doesn't make it excuseable.

Just curious -and I want an honest answer here - do you see Wright and his comments any differently than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell?

Yes.

So saying America deserved 9/11 because of the racist evils that have been perpetuated in this nation is beyond the pale... but saying that America deserved 9/11 because we've been shunned by God for being nice to gays, women, "liberals" et al is okay.

Gotcha. Yes, that's a perfectly coherent position.

If they said those things, then I definately lump them in with Wright.

I think you are inferring that my avatar is racist? If not, then I totally misread your intentions.If so... then you have a warped sense of reality. This guy (Wright) has been spouting hate for years. Just because it's aimed at white people doesn't make it excuseable.

Just curious -and I want an honest answer here - do you see Wright and his comments any differently than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell?

Yes.

Then the only reasonable conclusions that can be drawn is that you're the bigot - unless you're speaking from a position of ignorance. No other reasonable conclusions can be drawn. Now that's been established, I think it'll be easier to understand your other comments in the proper context. Either way - ignorance or bigotry - I don't think your arguments will carry much weight.

I do not agree with the reverend's sentiments. What I believe is that your beliefs about the progress of demographics you proclaim is somewhat less than the reality that exists. I also believe if you are bold enough to say it to spoiled twits on a Videogame forum, your convictions are less admirable than if you were bold enough to walk in a troubled community and say what you believe to anyone who would listen.

And so how does my opposition to the reverend have anything to do with systemic racisim I've already said exists? The comments I made -- and I have been clear and reiterated several times -- were in reference to efforts in business to give minority candidates a hand up, and help them when possible so that the workplace is more diverse. I fully believe in the benefits of a diverse workplace, and my overall point was the in corporate America that belief has been acknowledged and embraced.

NONE of this systemic racism makes what the reverend is saying right, but I think you more or less agreed with that with the first sentence in your response above.

I think you are inferring that my avatar is racist? If not, then I totally misread your intentions.If so... then you have a warped sense of reality. This guy (Wright) has been spouting hate for years. Just because it's aimed at white people doesn't make it excuseable.

Just curious -and I want an honest answer here - do you see Wright and his comments any differently than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell?

Yes.

Then the only reasonable conclusions that can be drawn is that you're the bigot - unless you're speaking from a position of ignorance. No other reasonable conclusions can be drawn. Now that's been established, I think it'll be easier to understand your other comments in the proper context. Either way - ignorance or bigotry - I don't think your arguments will carry much weight.

It could be ignorance if what Fireball said above is accurate. If Falwell and Robertson said those things, they definately are just as wrong as Wright.

I do not appreciate being called a bigot either by the way. That is inflamatory and unnecessary. (not to mention completely incorrect)

Ah yes, something bad happened in the past, thus excusing a completely nonsensical, divisive position that has no basis in evidence or logic.

Yeah, because the 1970s are the distant past. I love how, in your world, it's nonsensical to think the government might experiment on your particular ethnic group after the federal government codified a system of slavery that made you property, and then, after that was dispensed with, instituted a system where your particular ethnic group wasn't allowed to share the same fucking lunch table, sit at the front of a bus, or attend the same schools, as the dominant, ruling ethnic group, that same ruling ethnic group who, throughout the south, was defacto permitted to lynch people of your particular ethnic group, typically without any recourse. Again with the lack of empathy in conservatives. I'm beginning to think that's a necessary requirement.

I think you are inferring that my avatar is racist? If not, then I totally misread your intentions.If so... then you have a warped sense of reality. This guy (Wright) has been spouting hate for years. Just because it's aimed at white people doesn't make it excuseable.

Just curious -and I want an honest answer here - do you see Wright and his comments any differently than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell?

Yes.

Then the only reasonable conclusions that can be drawn is that you're the bigot - unless you're speaking from a position of ignorance. No other reasonable conclusions can be drawn. Now that's been established, I think it'll be easier to understand your other comments in the proper context. Either way - ignorance or bigotry - I don't think your arguments will carry much weight.

It could be ignorance if what Fireball said above is accurate. If Falwell and Robertson said those things, they definately are just as wrong as Wright.

It was briefly incomprehensible to me that you would have heard Wright's comments, but not Falwell's and Robertson's, but then I have no idea how much coverage they got on Fox News. I look forward to seeing how this affects your interest in voting for a Republican presidential candidate.

It could be ignorance if what Fireball said above is accurate. If Falwell and Robertson said those things, they definately are just as wrong as Wright.

I do not appreciate being called a bigot either by the way. That is inflamatory and unnecessary. (not to mention completely incorrect)

The only thing I can say is "too bad". It's either one or the other - there is no other reasonable conclusion. You've chosen ignorance. In the words of the immortal Holy Grail protector, "You have chosen poorly".

The problem with your debating skills is very similar to former liberal member of this board who is no longer allowed here: ideological demonization (even if your styles are thankfully different). As a result, you have major difficulties considering the other side of the discussion and cannot see the flaws on your side. That you wouldn't know the very widespread remarks of Falwell and Robertson on a number of issues - including their pathetic 9/11 comments - shows how insulated your data-gathering is. When you choose sources that only support one side, you've ensured that your opinion has been made for you. Reading sources that support a predetermined conclusion isn't a substitute for real research or even thinking. It's called herd mentality, and you're a sheep.